Apple iPhone Dissected 338
Conch writes "Only hours after the launch, the Apple iPhone has been dissected. The good folks at AnandTech violated one of the first iPhones to still our curiosity about whats inside the aluminum shell.
'Please note that we're doing this so you are not tempted to on your recent $500/$600 expenditure, while it is quite possible to take apart using easy to find tools we'd recommend against it as it will undoubtedly void your warranty and will most likely mar up the beautiful gadget's exterior.'"
Wow (Score:5, Interesting)
The software (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:What's that? (Score:3, Interesting)
You know as well as I, that Apple likes to keep control of their own things. And besides, it is not like there would be any business in a normal mobile store to sell iPhone batteries, whereas selling for instance Nokia batteries could be a good idea, because a lot of phones from Nokia uses the same batteries. I think even across brand names are the same battery used. Not until the iPhone becomes popular enough or Apple makes more phones that uses the same battery (and of course make it easy to exchange battery) will any other store consider selling them, and Apple knows that.
What do all those parts actually cost? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:SIM (Score:1, Interesting)
Why not just one chip? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Hooray Apple released a phone! (Score:2, Interesting)
STFU and go back to your bag of cheetos.
Re:Why not just one chip? (Score:3, Interesting)
1. Lots of proprietary chips from lots of vendors.
2. You lose greater economies of scale when engineering custom silicon. Instead of buying existing chips.
3. It's often easier to contain clock speeds and single-ended capacitance within the boundaries of a chip. Extra electronics is required to buffer the effects of clock/capacitance etc from other components. (I.E. Interference.)
4. If all the chips are together, then you can't upgrade anything in the next model.
5. Similar to point 4, if there is a fault, you can't flunk or swap out a chip on the assembly.
6. Various stability, heat and power savings by using a different chip for each function, e.g. h264 decoding will be on a different chip than the GSM functions.
Re:What's that? (Score:2, Interesting)
I had a couple, the current being a Nokia E62 I got for free from the phone company after my faithful Sony Ericsson P-800 died. My SE P-800 was my phone, PDA, camera (for emergencies, because it was a lousy one) and MP3 player for over 3 years and its battery was still strong (a single charge gave it 48 hours) the day it died the bad checksum death.
It's been since the early 90s the last time I saw a phone whose useful life did outlast its battery.
By the time the first iPhone batteries start dying, there will be a better model and you will want to move on to it.
For me, the AT&T tie-in and the ban on installing homebrew software (I need SSH) make the iPhone an unpractical choice. Too bad, because it's really beautiful.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Interesting)
Some people use their electronics to do things, not "keep pace with technology". My last $600 computer lasted me seven years.
Greenphone (Score:3, Interesting)
http://trolltech.com/products/qtopia/greenphone [trolltech.com]
And yes, the software is GPL'ed when you buy the community edition of the phone.
Re:Wow (Score:4, Interesting)
3G version launch for UK on Monday (Score:3, Interesting)
http://www.newswireless.net/index.cfm/article/346
If this is indeed true, it will certainly be what the market needs. I am surprised the US market would tolerate paying so much for a 2G phone.
Sounds like the US market is behind the 8 ball, with a couple of years to wait for a 3G - time will be indeed telling.
Re:Wow (Score:4, Interesting)
So I have an Apple cube running a smartboard, a powerbook from around 2000 that is my home entertainment setup, a powermac from around 1998 that isn't used much but still works very well, not to mention sundry mac classics, etc, that had to go away because they were not OS X capable.
My ipods still work, though I never was impressed with the battery life in them, nor do I like the Apple replacement policy, which is why I am hesitant about the iPhone. But the still work, compared to my Nomad, which has little plastic pieces broken off, which means that I paid about the same amount of money for a device that does not work.
The same applies to my high price phone. Battery lasted a year, then had to charge it every day if I used it, then had to pay $50 for a new one. OTOH, a few years on, my iPod battery is still tolerable. Hopefully, like the iPod, I can send in the iPhone for a battery swap. I think the issue is not going to be the value of the phone, but the value of the time to wait to swap out the phone. If one can't be without a phone for a couple days, and I know many people, even children, who can't, then those will be the ones who will have the new phone. The rest of us, trying to get the full value out of the product, will just eventually have two phones. One for every day, and one for sunday best.
Re:Wow (Score:2, Interesting)
Better experience all around, and probably cheaper operating costs. But that's just my guess.
Re:The software (Score:2, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:The battery is not replaceable by design. (Score:3, Interesting)
No, this is a major hassle and introduces the distinct possibility of frying the motherboard when trying to change the battery. You'll probably be able to send it off to Apple for a nominal fee (or third parties) but it's still hassle. There's also the critical issue of not being able to swap batteries if necessary. For an MP3 player, this doesn't mean much. For a critical business tool like a cellphone/PDA, this is much more significant.